Evidence Hub

Comparative efficacy and safety of first-line treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chen R, Hou X, Yang L, Zhao D

Thoracic cancer, 2019

26 citations

Abstract

Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the predominant type of lung cancer, and most clinically curable patients are diagnosed with locally advanced disease. Although the efficacy of standard platinum-based chemotherapy doublets is relatively limited. The effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains controversial, and its role in the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC is obscure. Thus, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of ICIs for advanced NSCLC.

Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane Central Register Trial, and American Society of Clinical Oncology databases were searched from inception to 30 April 2018. We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing single-agent programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab) or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 inhibitor (ipilimumab) with chemotherapy in NSCLC patients. Progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and adverse events were pooled for meta-analysis by Review Manager (RevMan version 5.3) software.

Results: After exclusion of ineligible studies, 12 eligible randomized controlled trials were included. Data showed that ICIs significantly improved progression-free survival (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.57-0.77, P < 0.00001), overall survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.91, P = 0.003), and but not objective response rate (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.25-3.13, P = 0.004) in all…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free